Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

+ - Graphene Light Bulb Coming To Stores Soon->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "A light bulb made from graphene — said by its UK developers to be the first commercially viable consumer product using the super-strong carbon — is to go on sale later this year. The dimmable LED bulb with a graphene-coated filament was designed at Manchester University, where the material was discovered in 2004. It is said to cut energy use by 10% and last longer owing to its conductivity. It is expected to be priced lower than current LED bulbs, which cost about £15 each."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:The whine of the flyback transformer (Score 1) 790

by leathered (#48787053) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Sounds We Don't Hear Any More?

I disagree. The problem is that there is there is no LCD monitor that does everything competently. $1500+ professional color-accurate monitors may be good for photoshop but are lousy for anything with moving images.

Want a good LCD for gaming? There are TN panels that will refresh at 144Hz with fast response times. The tradeoff is very poor color reproduction and narrow viewing angles.

An IPS panel will give better colors and viewing angles at the expense of low refresh (few go over 60Hz), and 'IPS glow' is a real problem with them.

Then there is the panel lottery you have to play when you buy them. Many vendors and manufacturers have a threshold for the number of dead/stuck pixels that are deemed acceptable. Backlight bleed and uniformity can vary widely between different monitors of the same make and model.

CRTs had issues with their bulk, limited size and power consumption but LCD have introduced a whole world of new problems.

Perhaps our only hope is more affordable and reliable OLED displays.

Comment: Re:The whine of the flyback transformer (Score 5, Interesting) 790

by leathered (#48784659) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Sounds We Don't Hear Any More?

I'm using a CRT monitor right now, a 21" IBM P275 with a Trinitron tube. Right now I'm enjoying near perfect color reproduction, blacks that are actually black, zero input lag, no ghosting, nothing that resembles backlight bleed and no stuck/dead pixels. Haven't noticed flyback whine for years but that's probably down to my age. LCD is still inferior to CRT in many ways and you have to wonder what CRTs we would have today if development had continued. LCD has also taken a step backwards recently with the introduction of LED backlights, they make for thinner panels and lower power consumption but uniformity of many recent panels is really poor.

Having said that, my CRT will probably have to go this year, most probably late in the spring when the heat the thing generates is no longer welcome. My desk is also sagging from the weight of it sitting there for nine years.

Comment: Ofcom (Score 5, Informative) 57

If Ofcom really want to help ham radio operators they could do more to ban or restrict power network adapters and the multitude of other gadgets that leak QRM all over the airwaves.

Bring back the Radiocommunications Agency. Ofcom is a behemoth that has its fingers in too many pies to be an effective regulator.

Comment: Re:So 1024 Bits Not Enough Now? (Score 1) 67

by leathered (#47838421) Attached to: Mozilla 1024-Bit Cert Deprecation Leaves 107,000 Sites Untrusted

I was thinking the same, and I'm no expert in cryptography. After all distributed.net have spent 12 years trying to brute-force a 72-bit key and have only managed to test 3% of the total keys. 2^1024 is such a mind-bogglingly large number the entire world's computers couldn't crack it in a billion lifetimes.

Anyway, wiki to the rescue:

As of 2003 RSA Security claims that 1024-bit RSA keys are equivalent in strength to 80-bit symmetric keys, 2048-bit RSA keys to 112-bit symmetric keys and 3072-bit RSA keys to 128-bit symmetric keys. RSA claims that 1024-bit keys are likely to become crackable some time between 2006 and 2010 and that 2048-bit keys are sufficient until 2030. An RSA key length of 3072 bits should be used if security is required beyond 2030.[6] NIST key management guidelines further suggest that 15360-bit RSA keys are equivalent in strength to 256-bit symmetric keys.

Have you ever noticed that the people who are always trying to tell you `there's a time for work and a time for play' never find the time for play?

Working...